SOWORE: SHORT OF SURETIES?
Abiodun Gboyega writes that Sowore will be let out if the bail conditions are perfected
“Considering the pedigree of the first defendant as observed in his application, it is rather unfortunate that no one is willing to stand as his surety on those terms. On the other hand, it creates an assumption that despite the pedigree of the first defendant, none of his best associates is willing to stand for him. This poses a cause for concern.”
Those were the candid words of Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, the judge who presided over the case of Omoyele Sowore, while ruling on the application for variation of conditions for his bail after observing that he had not met the bail conditions granted to him. It is intriguing that this noteworthy comment was not as widely reported in the media as one would expect, especially in the context of the on-going sensationalized coverage of the issue of alleged refusal of the DSS authorities to release Sowore on bail in compliance with court order.
Equally remarkable is the loud silence of the usually vociferous lead counsel to Sowore, Femi Falana, on the issue of Sowore’s sureties whose identities and whereabouts remain a mystery to the general public. Even supposedly well-informed commentators and newspaper editorials have continued to denounce the DSS for holding onto Sowore, deliberately ignoring its spokesman’s repeated unequivocal reference to the routine and logical due process requirement for those who stood as sureties for Sowore to come and be on record to receive him on bail from DSS custody.
In the ensuing melodrama that climaxed when a busload of Sowore’s associates attempted to demand his release in a protest at the DSS headquarters in Abuja, Femi Falana consistently evaded the needful role of Sowore’s sureties in taking over responsibility for him on bail from DSS custody. Instead, he resorted to sending lawyers to the DSS and repeating accusations that the DSS was defying court order for release of Sowore on bail in response to which the DSS spokesman retorted: “Sowore was granted bail and we say that he is in our custody. Do we bring Sowore out to the gate and ask him to go?’ What if Sowore was going on the road and he was knocked down by a car? People who should take Sowore and do proper documentation have not come up until now”.
Interestingly, the Punch on November 4 quoted Inibehe Effiong, one of Sowore’s lawyers saying “we are in the process of perfecting his bail” in a report that Sowore had rejected an offer by Apostle Johnson Suleman, President Omega Worldwide Fire Ministries to stand surety for him even though Sowore himself, using a phone given him by DSS, told Premium Times from custody, that the demand for his sureties was an attempt to intimidate them into pulling out, adding “their aim is to intimidate my sureties by subjecting them to undue maltreatment”.
From all indications, there is no assurance regarding the status of Sowore’s sureties in the public domain except for the undisputed fact that they have not turned up at the DSS headquarters to receive him on bail. Notwithstanding Femi Falana’s insistence on the supposed legality of DSS handing him over to his lawyers, the precedence set in the case of Nnamdi Kanu of IPOB, who was bailed by his well-known sureties before escaping from the country and jeopardizing his sureties, would definitely serve as a forewarning to the DSS against disregarding the responsibility of the sureties as endorsed by the court.
It would also serve the cause of public interest and accountability better if the Sowore sureties would rise to the occasion by speaking out, if not showing up, to explain their hesitation or refusal to do the needful for Sowore in his hour of need, rather than leaving the matter in a contest of convincing contentions that the DSS is clearly on top as long as the sureties remain in the shadows.
Merely shifting the arena from the court to the media has not played out as a legal leverage in favour of the main issue of getting Sowore out on bail which should be the ultimate objective of Femi Falana and his learned colleagues. The propaganda dividend that seems to massage the bloated egos of the human rights and pro-democracy “activists” as they maraud the politicians’ paradise is grossly devalued by lack of grassroots sureties and soon fizzles out as both Sowore and Falana know from aborted presidential and governorship ambitions respectively.
Justice Ojukwu’s concerns as to why Sowore was having challenges in getting sureties, either considering or despite his pedigree “as observed in his application for bail” should have been overcome by now especially by “his best associates”, none of whom was willing to stand for him. It is odd for a former presidential candidate who has conjured a larger than life impression of his popularity to be left in the lurch in the manner described by Justice Ojukwu.
Mercifully, the DSS custodial hostels are comfort zones and Sowore had been accorded respect and courtesy enjoying access to people and use of facilities like telephones, gymnasium, television, newspapers and medical treatment while his sureties (and lawyers) sort themselves out. Meanwhile, it is no less a matter of concern that even out of circulation, Sowore is stirring the political atmosphere in the country with a make-believe fiasco over sureties that cannot be identified and will not even join in accusing the DSS of defying “lawful order” to let them take him home!